Mediehistoria skrivs ofta utifrån ett medium i taget. Den här boken argumenterar istället för att historiens medier utvecklats tillsammans.
Nya former, tekniker och praktiker har interagerat med gamla, innehåll har cirkulerat medierna emellan och rader av aktörer har aktivt relaterat till en helhet av uttrycksformer. Denna helhet var konturfast på ett vis som gör det befogat att tala om ett historiskt mediesystem: summan av en viss tids medier och deras inbäddning i sociala, politiska och ekonomiska villkor. I ett antal delstudier prövar boken möjligheterna att på närgången empirisk nivå undersöka 1800-talets mediesystem.
This study treats ideas of how newspapers should be edited, from the middle of the 18th century to the middle of the 19th century. It deals both with notions of communication and how these were carried out. The empirical focus is on the Swedish province Östergötland and its two main cities, the ecclesiastical, military and administrative Linköping and the mercantile and financially important Norrköping. The dissertation, which to a great extent is concerned with the history of concepts, is divided into three parts: "A Civic Press, 18th Century", "Marginalisation and Modern Breakthrough, 1790–1840" and "Modern Press Established, 1840s".
The dissertation shows that what could be termed A Civic Press (or A Press of the Citizens) dominated during the 18th century. The publishers of newspapers considered it their duty to publish letters to the paper. The newspaper reading citizens identified a corresponding right. The newspaper should not merely reflect or represent a public debate; it should actually be one, in order to promote a better society. This ideal was to a great extent put into practice – primarily by the traditional and enlightened élite of the Old Regime. The birth of the modern, liberal press is best seen as a marginalisation of the Civic press. The publisher, who saw himself obliged to publish what was sent to him, was gradually replaced by a new and rather absolutist kind of editor (in Swedish called publicist) whose explicit goal was to reach lower social strata. This change can also be seen as a professionalization. An important result is the chronology that the dissertation establishes for this process. The Civic press was long-lived. Eventually many of the conservative opponents of the modern press gave in and adopted the liberal way of editing. The Civic press is nevertheless easy to trace as late as around the middle of the 19th century.
Those who criticised the modern press, did so to a large extent with the Civic press as an ideal in mind. These today somewhat neglected editors and debaters – often seen as agents of an Absolutist public sphere or as enemies of the freedom of the press per se – celebrated, in other words, what is the closest historians will ever get to finding Habermas’ ideal type.
This paper argues for the relevance of the media history of the press. Using a broad and open media concept, this perspective should be understood as the study of the construction and communication of the self-images and ideology of the press. Rather than describing the complex of problems as images that are ‘spread’ through one channel (newspapers) by one actor (the press), it should be seen as a mutual exchange between various media and various actors. Different audiences have been resources for the press, just as the press has been a resource for them. Instead of separating proper journalism, the spreading of the self-image, and the reception of different audiences as clearly defined areas, they must be seen as constituting each other. Focusing on the funeral of Swedish editor Lars Hierta, the paper argues for the methodological advantages inherent in the media event and the surrounding cultural circumstances.
By examining the National Society Sweden–Germany (Riksföreningen Sverige–Tyskland) 1938–1958, this article highlights a key aspect of far right-wing opinion building, namely its media criticism and objectivity ideal. Far right-wing opinion building is too often depicted as easily comprehensible and appealing to strong emotions. If its objectivity-oriented and neutrality-footed media criticism with scholarly and non-political overtones is taken into consideration a more nuanced understanding can be reached. The article relates this criticism to the Swedish Government’s information policy, to notions of the historic role of the press as a propaganda channel, to ideals in contemporary journalism, and to a tradition of conservative media criticism. By uncovering the rationality that supported them, the purpose is ultimately to understand the attraction these standpoints could exercise. Since these ways to argue hardly died with the war a deeper historical understanding appears the more imperative.